I’ve found some information on the importance of your Step 1 score and getting into a residency. Obviously it’s important, as we all know, but it’s not everything. Here are some articles. What do you think?
RESOURCES FOR USMLE STEP 1
Click on the links or images to learn more about each book.
First Aid for the USMLE Step 1 2009: A Student to Student Guide (First Aid Series) by Tao LeFirst Aid for the USMLE Step 1 (2010)
===============================
High-Yield Behavioral Science (High-Yield Series) by Barbara Fadem
=================================
High-Yield Embryology: A Collaborative Project of Medical Students and Faculty (High-Yield Series) by Ronald W Dudek
===============================
BRS Physiology by Linda S Costanzo
Clinical Microbiology Made Ridiculously Simple by Mark Gladwin
BRS Cell Biology and Histology
High-yield Behavioral Science
MedEssentials: High-Yield USMLE Step 1 Review
First Aid QAndA for the USMLE Step 1
USMLE Step 1 Secrets by Brown
——————————————-
1: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Mar;88(3):671-6. Links
Orthopaedic in-training examination scores: a correlation with USMLE results.Black KP, Abzug JM, Chinchilli VM.
Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, P.O. Box 850, M.C. H089, Hershey, PA 17033, USA. kblack@psu.edu
BACKGROUND: Both the United States Medical Licensing Examination and the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination measure factual recall as well as interpretative and problem-solving skills. The former examination is used to a variable degree by postgraduate programs in resident selection. Orthopaedic In-Training Examination scores are one measure of the medical knowledge of residents and are used by all American orthopaedic residency programs on a yearly basis. This investigation was performed to retrospectively review Orthopaedic In-Training Examination scores of orthopaedic residents who took the examination in our program. In addition, we sought to determine whether a relationship existed between performance on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination and the United States Medical Licensing Examinations taken while in medical school. METHODS: The records of each orthopaedic resident who took the examination from November 1993 through November 2000 were reviewed. Correlation coefficients and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to assess the relationship, if any, between the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination percentiles and the three-digit scores on the Step-1 and Step-2 United States Medical Licensing Examination. In addition, examination scores were evaluated longitudinally from year-in-training 1 through 4. RESULTS: A significant moderate-sized correlation was found between United States Medical Licensing Examination Step-2 scores and Orthopaedic In-Training Examination score percentiles (p < 0.05); however, with the numbers available, no correlation was seen between United States Medical Licensing Examination Step-1 scores and Orthopaedic In-Training Examination scores. The mean Orthopaedic In-Training Examination scores were in the 66th percentile for year-in-training 1, the 53rd percentile for year 2, the 57th percentile for year 3, and the 50th percentile for year 4. Residents in the laboratory for one year scored in the 88th percentile while in the laboratory (year 0), in the 86th percentile in year 1, and in the 48th percentile in year 4. CONCLUSION: Although Step-1 United States Medical Licensing Examination scores have been used by our department as a major factor in resident selection historically, our data failed to reveal a significant correlation with performance on the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination. The decrease in Orthopaedic In-Training Examination scores over time for our residents who worked in the laboratory is most likely attributable to multiple factors, including clinical workload hours.
———
1: Acad Med. 1993 Oct;68(10):753-9. Links
Comment in:
Acad Med. 1993 Oct;68(10):778.
Use of the USMLE to select residents.
Berner ES, Brooks CM, Erdmann JB.
University of Alabama School of Medicine, Office of Educational Development, Birmingham 35294-2041.
Many studies have examined the relationships between students’ performances on the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Part I and Part II examinations and their postgraduate clinical performances. Most studies have found a positive relationship between students’ NBME examination scores and the ratings of residents’ clinical performances and/or scores on specialty board certification examinations. Surveys of residency directors have also shown that NBME scores are used as part of the process for selecting residents, although other data and other selection criteria are considered more useful than the NBME scores. One area of continued concern is that a large body of data on the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) is not yet available. However, the predictive validity of the NBME scores supports the use of USMLE scores as part of the review process to screen potential residents. Residency directors should continue to use a variety of criteria in their final selection decisions and are encouraged to use their own program-specific data to establish and monitor particular cutoff scores for screening applicants.
Thanks for reading. What do you think?
1: J Am Coll Surg. 2008 Mar;206(3):533-9. Epub 2007 Nov 26. Links
Does US Medical Licensing Examination Step l score really matter in surgical residency match outcomes (and should it)?Andriole DA, Yan Y, Jeffe DB.
Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO 63110, USA. andrioled@wustl.edu
BACKGROUND: The relationship between US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scores and core surgical-specialty match outcomes has not been well defined. STUDY DESIGN: With IRB approval, we measured associations between aggregate Step 1 scores and other specialty-specific, match-process variables for 3 surgical-specialty matches. Chi-square tests measured differences between proportions of US students and independent applicants (ie, all non-US allopathic student applicants) who matched. Independent samples t-tests compared differences in Step 1 scores between matched- and unmatched-applicant groups. Pearson correlations measured the magnitude and direction of associations between matched-applicants’ Step 1 scores and other variables of interest and between Step 1 scores for all match participants and percentage of positions filled by US students (two-tailed p values). RESULTS: Step 1 scores were lower for unmatched- than matched-applicant groups for each specialty examined (each p < 0.0001). Matched-applicant groups’ Step 1 scores positively correlated with each unmatched-applicant groups’ Step 1 scores (r =.82, p < 0.0001), Step 1 gap between matched- and unmatched-applicant groups’ scores (r = .40, p = 0.035), percentage of positions filled by US students (r = .62, p < 0.0001), and mean number of applications filed/applicant (r = .50, p < 0.0001). Step 1 scores for all match participants correlated with percentage of positions filled by US students (r = .61, p = 0.0006). CONCLUSIONS: Step 1 scores were closely related to match process outcomes and match participation itself, with increasing Step 1 scores among both matched- and unmatched-applicant groups as specialty selectivity increased.
PMID: 18308226 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
RESOURCES
=========================
USMLE STEP 1
First Aid for the USMLE Step 1 (2010)
High-Yield Behavioral Science by Barbara Fadem
High-Yield Embryology by Ronald W Dudek
BRS Physiology by Linda S Costanzo ($5)
Clinical Microbiology Made Ridiculously Simple by Mark Gladwin
BRS Cell Biology and Histology
High-yield Behavioral Science
MedEssentials: High-Yield USMLE Step 1 Review
First Aid QAndA for the USMLE Step 1
USMLE Step 1 Secrets by Brown
